'Don't ask' critic Dan Choi honorably discharged

Army 1st Lt. Dan Choi, photographed in June 2009. (Photo by Asterick blog)

One of the most vocal critics of the military's “don't ask, don't tell” policy has been honorably discharged for being in violation of the policy.

Dan Choi, a West Point graduate and first lieutenant with the Army National Guard, said he learned of the decision on Thursday.

“It's painful mostly, not that my career is coming to an end, but really that it's been a very difficult year,” he said in an interview.

Though his discharge has been rumored for weeks in the gay blogosphere and among gay rights activists, Choi said he only officially learned of the discharge on Thursday after a phone call from his commander.

"The Army said I was notified by letter to my home of record, which is Orange County, Calif.," Choi said. "My dad apparently signed for the letter and, well, that’s what they say."

Choi hasn't spoken to his father since October, he said.

He emerged as the face of gay and lesbian service members discharged under the policy when he came out publicly during a March 2009 MSNBC interview -- essentially violating "don't ask, don't tell" in front of a primetime television audience.

The military started discharge proceedings shortly after the interview. The move angered gay rights groups and other opponents of the policy, who cited Choi's training as an Arab linguist as reason enough to keep him in the military.

Choi has been arrested several times for disorderly conduct at rallies in opposition to "don't ask" and other anti-gay policies. On Tuesday officers arrested him in Las Vegas at a rally in support of the Employment Non Discrimination Act. In March he was arrested in Washington for handcuffing himself to a White House fence. Prosecutors dropped charges against him without explanation last week shortly after he said he would subpoena President Obama if his case went to trial.

Choi said he spends his time "couch surfing" between the homes of friends in New York and Washington. He will reenlist if the Pentagon repeals the policy.

"The statute hasn’t been lifted yet," he said. "And I’m still going to be an activist. I’m still going to be fighting loudly for equal rights. I don’t find the two incompatible, I’ll do both. I believe being an activist makes me a better soldier, and being a soldier makes me a better activist."

The House included a repeal of “don't ask” in its version of the annual defense spending bill and the Senate is expected to do the same later this year. On Friday a federal judge in California is scheduled to hear closing arguments in a case brought by the conservative, pro-gay Log Cabin Republicans that challenges the constitutionality of the policy.

• Pentagon faces new pressures to trim budget: The combination of big budget deficits, the winding down of the war in Iraq and President Obama’s pledge to begin pulling troops from Afghanistan next year were leading Congress to contemplate reductions in Pentagon financing requests.

• Panel: Pentagon should freeze hiring, slash management: The Defense Business Board offered its initial proposals on how the Pentagon can cut $100 billion from its budget over the next five years.

• Mental illness costing military soldiers: Last year, 1,224 soldiers with a mental illness, such as post-traumatic stress disorder, received a medical discharge.

INTERIOR DEPARTMENT:
• Salazar pledges to limit Interior's revolving door: He offered few details about what rules he might exact but told lawmakers that he will report back.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT:
• U.S. lays out case against Arizona law: Federal and Arizona state lawyers sparred over whether the law, known locally as SB1070, violates the United States Constitution’s supremacy clause

STATE DEPARTMENT:
• State Dept. planning to field a small army in Iraq: In a year or so, contractors in Iraq could be driving armored vehicles, flying aircraft, operating surveillance systems, even retrieving casualties if there are violent incidents and disposing of unexploded ordnance.

• Three U.S. Embassy guards killed in rocket attack in Baghdad's Green Zone: Two of the guards killed were Ugandan and one was Peruvian, embassy officials said.

What a shame to lose such a talented and useful officer. Hopefully, the military (all branches) can come to a decision about how to successfully repeal that act. Sexual preference should have no bearing on ability to serve.

"What a shame to lose such a talented and useful officer. Hopefully, the military (all branches) can come to a decision about how to successfully repeal that act. Sexual preference should have no bearing on ability to serve.
Posted by: HappyArmyWife | July 23, 2010 6:55 AM | Report abuse"

if sexual preference has no bearing on the ability to serve, why did he try to make it so...
he made it a point to say I'm gay and here I am...
instead of just serving honorable...
leaving his sexuality at home...

DwightCollins said: "if sexual preference has no bearing on the ability to serve, why did he try to make it so...
he made it a point to say I'm gay and here I am...
instead of just serving honorable...
leaving his sexuality at home..."
---------------------------------

That's not fair, and it shows the double standard applied to straight versus gay/lesbian soldiers. Straight people don't have to leave their sexuality at home- they talk about it a lot in the military- something gay and lesbian soldiers/airmen/sailors are not allowed to do. This unequal treatment alone is reason enough for the policy to be unconstitutional. The other reason is that it is almost impossible to completely hide your private life from your co-workers in the military. The policy therefore forces many people out of the miliatary, even when they try to comply with the policy.

Open the wardrobe is not yet found love after another the right clothes?
So, also waiting for? Immediate action bar!
Welcome to { http://www.smalltrade.net } sure you will find what you need.
Moreover, the company has a good reputation,product quality standards,
at reasonable prices. Over the years, has been well received by overseas
friends for their support. Therefore, please rest assured purchase.
welcome to :==== http://www.smalltrade.net =======

All of the arguments I have read regarding gays in the military appear to be predicated on the assumption that it will always be all-volunteer. If some future administration blunders or lies the country into a war too big to be fought entirely with volunteers, and the current policy is still in effect, it could bite the military square in the buttocks. If they tried to keep the ban in place, a lot of people would be coming out of the closet who were never in the closet in the first place. If they tried to change policy, gays and lesbians who had grown up hearing their presence in the military was contrary to good order and discipline, would sue. By the time the lawyers got through fighting it out, the war would be over.

1st Lt. Dan Choi is to be admired - he was living his life cloaked in a lie and in dispair. His honesty cost him (and all of us)his discharge from the military. Whether one is 'for' or 'against' gays and lesbians serving in the military is NOT the issue. The one an only issue is for ALL to have the SAME RIGHTS under our laws that a majority of Americans now enjoy. Dan Choi -in or out of the military- will always be remembered as a good and noble human being, with his quest for honesty above reproach.

I hope that once the ban is lifted, he will reapply for his commission and finish out the term that he signed up for. On a side note, Arabic must be a really gay language or something, because we always hear about these linguists being outed over DADT...

Why is it okay for my Army husband to introduce me to his fellow soldiers as his wife ... yet his co-worker would be discharged if he introduced his same-sex husband? Big surprise people, there ARE gays and lesbians in the military right now! Making them keep it a secret is ridiculous. They should be allowed the same freedoms my husband has. Repeal don't ask, don't tell - there should be no barriers to anyone who wants to enlist.

I'm a retired Army Colonel. I don't fault the lieutenant for his sexual orientation; that's his affair. I also believe, as many of my former colleagues in uniform believe, that DADT is an ill-conceived and unworkable policy. Regardless, as an officer you are required to obey lawful orders. 1LT Choi chose not to do so. Further, he placed the interest of his sex life over the interests of his mission. He crossed the boundary of conduct unbecoming of an officer not when he said he was gay, but when he made a public spectacle of himself. It's for this that I fault him. He is fortunate he got an honorable discharge. His conduct warranted something much less.

If a writer is going to report on military matters, one must familiarize self with the military.
Stated that Lt. Choi would "re-enlist" if allowed. OFFICERS DON'T "ENLIST" -- enlisted people ENLIST and RE-ENLIST. Officers renew their Commissions.
Yes, this officer can be forced to repay the taxpayers for his education. According to law, and his written agreement to the Army, stating that he qualifies "to the best of his knowledge," to enter the U.S. Military Academy without intent of fraud or ill-intent. After receiving a free education -- at taxpayer expense, he knowingly violated his agreement by violating DADT.
He could be forced to re-pay the government, (it happens often) and his diploma could be struck from the Acadamy.
I retired from the military a whole generation ago, (1987) so I can't speak for today's troops' feelings about DADT. I can affirm my beliefe for strict adhearence to rules, regulations,and laws pertaining to the military. He broke away from the Honor Code. Good bye!

If a writer is going to report on military matters, one must familiarize self with the military.
Stated that Lt. Choi would "re-enlist" if allowed. OFFICERS DON'T "ENLIST" -- enlisted people ENLIST and RE-ENLIST. Officers renew their Commissions.
Yes, this officer can be forced to repay the taxpayers for his education. According to law, and his written agreement with the Army, stating that he qualifies "to the best of his knowledge," to enter the U.S. Military Academy without intent of fraud or ill-intent. If he suddenly realized that he was gay, half way through his tenure at the USMA, he could have resigned or kept his sexuality to himself.
After receiving a free education -- at taxpayer expense, he knowingly violated his agreement by violating DADT.
He could be forced to re-pay the government, (it happens often) and his diploma could be struck from the Acadamy.
I retired from the military a whole generation ago, (1987) so I can't speak for today's troops' feelings about DADT. I can affirm my beliefe for strict adhearence to rules, regulations,and laws pertaining to the military. He broke away from the Honor Code. Good bye!

Nothing at all "honorable" about this guy. He knew the rule before entering the army and broke it on national TV. And apparently breaks the law regularly including chaining himself to a public fence. Yet he comes out with an honorable discharge and the charges dropped. Is there any reason for people to obey the law these days? Apparently not for the special pets of the Obama Administration.

Closing question -- what will repealing DADT do to the costs to the military of treating AIDS? And doesn't having a higher percent of HIV positive troops in combat where blood gets slung around constitute a risk to our soldiers? Watch this get swept under the carpet.

I too went to a service academy, long before DADT. I left after my five year obligation because I could not be myself. DADT did not change the fact that gay service members are forced into a life of deception. Go to a wardroom party and have the CO’s wife ask if you have a girlfriend. Say “no” and there is a good chance she will try and set you up with one. The military is a social community that includes family, with ship picnics, command Christmas parties, and events surrounding charities. OK, a young officer can get by going stag, but what about a mid-grade officer, or a Commanding Officer. (CO’s wives are supposed to be president of the ship’s “Wives Club”)
The service academies do not train midshipman and cadets for minimum obligations, they train them for careers. Can a gay man achieve command without a wife? Sure! Will there be rumors, you bet. Saying you should keep your personal life quite would be good if the military was a 9 to 5 job, but it is not. It is a 24/7 job, and the partners of gays in the military are expected to understand and accept that fact, but they cannot “reach out” to anyone when the stress gets real, cause that would be illegal under the current rules. The US military is a way of life that includes service member families, that’s why we spend so much money on making them part of the equation. DADT seems to say that gay service members families are less important and do not deserve the same treatment we offer wives and children.
1st Lt Choi discharge is a loss to the army and a bad return on an investment by the taxpayers. He most likely entered West Point at age 17 or 18, and if he was like I was, did not really know what his orientation was. Service Academies are like any other collage, boys, become men. He most likely did not knowingly break his oath before he made it, it happened as his life evolved. He was taught Duty, Honor, Country, and then was told to lie to her employer about his life style. Mixed messages that do nothing that confuse dedicated men and women, and cause needless pain and suffering.

@DPetray
I respect your opinion and appreciate your service and experience, but I think you are missing the point. I would guess that Choi sees protection of our constitution as the primary mission, and DADT is a violation of his rights and the rights of many other service members under the constitution. Additionally, DADT is itself contrary to "the mission" in that it forces service members to lie and in many cases results in the discharge of those who have much to add to the current conflicts. Viewed from that perspective he most certainly is acting in the interests of the mission.

I support the repeal of DADT - the sooner the better - and applaud Choi's choice to come out publicly in the face of the policy knowing it would lead to this. However, he chained himself to the White House fence while in uniform and should have been court-martialed for it. That should have been the basis for his discharge.

Closing question -- what will repealing DADT do to the costs to the military of treating AIDS? And doesn't having a higher percent of HIV positive troops in combat where blood gets slung around constitute a risk to our soldiers? Watch this get swept under the carpet.

Posted by: DaMav

If you want to use this argument then we should only allow white lesbians to serve since they have the lowest HIV infection rate. Think before you post.

Posted by: KathyWi
-----------------------------------------
Let's see...the rule--you can be gay and serve in the military, but you can't say that you are gay, and no one can ask if you are gay either. So...if someone suspects that you are gay, and they ask if you are; are they then subject to discharge also? A rule that basically says that you must lie about who you are is a fellable rule and should be thrown out. This is a basic human rights issue, and I find it hard to believe that in 2010 in America something like this still exist. I am a Black Christian woman; I believe wholeheartedly in the Holy Bible--cover to cover, but I also believe that the Word can and is distorted for personal preferences. I believe that homosexuality is a sin, just as adultery, fornication, lying, stealing, cursing, and envy are sins too. A sin is a sin and not one is greater than the other. So when the Word says "we all" sin (present tense) and have fallen short of His Glory, I immediately include myself in the "all." Therefore, all I can do is live my life in a manner that pleases Him; judgment of others is not pleasing in His sight. All of us will have to atone for our own sins one day; but none of us have a right to judge others on their sin...he who is without sin cast the first stone.

This Don't Ask Don't Tell rule causes people to lie which is just as much a sin as homosexuality. We are supposed to love one another--hate the sin love the sinner; how can one say that they love someone when they are committing them to sin--lying?

I am just so sick of us holier than thou Americans; hating anyone who is not like us--whose sin is not the same as our sin. Everyone who is reading this post and even those who have not have sinned in one way or another--either you've fornicated, committed adultery (remember these two sins are not necessarily physical they can also be committed in your mind), lied, cheated, envied, cursed, etc. So let's stop judging others when we face judgment ourselves.

Lt. Choi is a good soldier; I was watching the Rachel Maddow show when he announced that he was gay—shame on his father for not speaking with him since; don’t he know that it was his sperm that created his son in whatever form he is in? I thought that was the begining of the repeal of the Don't Ask Don't Tell rule, because surely--I thought--the military would repell the act rather than get rid of such a fine soldier. I simply cannot wrap my brain around the idea that being gay is something that someone would choose in this day and age of hate. As a Christian, it was very difficult for me to defend homosexuality, but when I look at it for what it is, a human rights violation—not so difficult. Many of you who are judging gays for their lifestyle will face judgment yourself one day for your judgment upon them. Get a life people—deal with your own sin and leave others' alone!

Closing question -- what will repealing DADT do to the costs to the military of treating AIDS? And doesn't having a higher percent of HIV positive troops in combat where blood gets slung around constitute a risk to our soldiers? Watch this get swept under the carpet.

Posted by: DaMav
------------------------------------
Idiot, Don't Ask Don't Tell, does not stop people from being gay, it gives them permission to be remain in the military gay and to lie about it. Aids--slinging blood--you are truly an idiot!

Unless Choi only discovered he was Gay after he had signed his commitment papers, he committed fraud by going to West Point. While DADT only keeps the service from inquiring about one's sexuality, it is and was still illegal to join knowing that you are gay.

That being the case, Dan Choi should have recieved a dishonorable discharge or a discharge other than honorable.

Assuming he knew he was gay when he began his service, then the Military could have discharged him for fraud which would could have been honorable, less-than-honorable, or dishonorable, thier choice. As any military lawyer will tell you, proving the knowledge and intent of fraud in these types of cases is nearly impossible.

Since the discharge was for a violation of DADT however, unless there are aggravated circumstances (attempted forcefull sexual contact, etc), the policy has been to make the discharge reflect the prior service record.

It is criminal for the military to waste all that money on training gays and lesbians then discharging them either honorably or dishonorably because a few prejudiced intolerant homophobic people who obliviously have no character, honor, or intelligence have deemed gays and lesbians unfit to serve with “straight” men and women. Are “straight” military personnel so soft and delicate they have to be shielded from anything they consider “not normal”?

The military personnel who should be discharged or never allowed to enlist in the first place are the ones who have a problem serving with gays and lesbians since they are the ones who have a problem with discrimination and an inability to carry out their duties due to their personal prejudices. In my mind this makes them poor military choices. If they can’t carry out their duties with gays and lesbians today, then who or what will stop them from doing their duties tomorrow? Military personnel should be blind and oblivious to the personalities around them and just concentrate on each doing their jobs and carrying out their mission. The only criticism should be in how well they do their job.

Other than parabolic weapons that drop in on an arc to kill U.S. military personnel, the only concern about "straight" in the service ought to be the bullet that is aimed "straight" at our people by people who detest us. I do not think the bullet cares what the sexual persuasion of the intended target is, and neither should we.

1LT Dan Choi was a poor performer as evidenced by the fact when he came out in March 2009 on tthe Rachel Maddow show he was not a Captain O-3. To hear Maddow and others talk this was one of the best officers the Army had.

After graduating West Point in 2003 he was on active duty for five years. An officer gets to O-3 pretty much automatically at year four. Thus when he came out that he was gay he had probably been passed over for promotion to O-3 at least twice.

Promotion to Captain is almost 100 percent. Anyone not promoted is a poor performer and their career is over. This is even more shocking since he graduated from West Point, which usually gives you a leg up. He apparently did not think his chances of making O-3 in the Guard were very good or he would have waited until he made Captain and the come out as a gay man.

Choi's being a poster child for gay rights is probably making him a large chunk of money and the longer he can keep his face in the news he can probably pull in a 6 figure income each year. I am sure he will be challenging his discharge in the courts after he exhausts his administrative remedies. All in all a pretty good deal for a poor performing officer. If he was heterosexual no one would care if he was discharged for failing to be promoted or for some other reason poor performance basis.

OBAMA HE'S THEIR BLOODLINE KIN TO BOTH BUSH, CHENEY AND THE QUEEN OF THE UNITED KINGDOM and QUEEN BEATRIX

PUBLIC HUMANE FUDICIARY TO OVERTURN AND STOP UNJUST/ INHUMANE TREATMENT BY OTHERS MIS-USE OF RELIGION AS AN EXCUSE FOR HATRED MIS-USED TO PERPETRATE CRIMINAL HATE CRIMES,The case is Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, 08-1371.(ATTEMPT TO OVERTURN Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954), Radical Republicans repassed the Civil Rights Bill and were also able to get the Reconstruction Acts passed in 1867 and 1868.CIVIL RIGHTS)DEMAND HUMANE CIVILITY RIGHTS FOR ALL US CITIZENS AS THE RADICAL REPUBLICANS WANTED

THE US CONSTITUTION ART4 SEC2(1)THE CITIZENS OF EACH STATE SHALL BE ENTITLED TO ALL PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF CITIZENS IN THE SEVERAL STATES, They are US CITIZENS OR NOT ? ,THERE'ER WANTING TO PROTECT OLD GLORY , 28USC3002(15)(A)(B)(C),atpresent SAME SEXERS are the INHUMANE SLAVE LABOR

Magan Mc Cain, The McCAINS, The BUSHES , The CHENEYS'(Fascist Religious X-tians will turn fully ASAP on his SAME SEX MARRIED Daughter when he passes AND THEN SPEAK OUT OPENLY AGAINST HER,HER PARTNER AND CHILD, AS WITH ANY OTHER POLITICIAN, CEO, WEALTHY, CELEBRITY etc. WHO'S CHILD IS SAME SEX) , THE LOG CABIN REPUBLICANS, BOTH MLKjr & Coretta Scott King 3 OUT OF 4 of their children etc support it and Bayard Rustin (His strategizer/ and speech writer "I Have A "Dream"too ,Obama is both (Bush/Cheney etc) of thier BLOOD KIN, Remember that too!!!!!!!!

DO NOT GIVE CONSENT(BY PUBLIC VOTE) A PRECEDENCE TO DISCRIMINATION/ JIM CROW SEGREGATION (SMOKE SCREENED AS Extremist RELIGIOUS FAITH IN "GOD") ON ANY US CITIZEN, THAT PRECEDENT OF CONSENT (BY PUBLIC VOTE) WILL BE USED AGAINST ALL MINORITIES AND WOMEN (NOW), CIVIL RIGHTS, AFFIRMATIVE ACTION etc IN THE NEAR FUTURE THE "CHILLING EFFECT" IS "CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER" TO ALL US CITIZENS, (THE Facist RELIGIOUS SMOKE SCREEN OF JIM CROW PRECEDENCE BY CONSENT OF PUBLIC VOTE) PRACTICE HUMANE CIVILITY MATTHEW CHAPTERS 5,6,7, NOT SELF-RIGHTIOUSNESS

PUBLIC HUMANE FUDICIARY TO OVERTURN AND STOP UNJUST/ INHUMANE TREATMENT BY OTHERS MIS-USE OF RELIGION AS AN EXCUSE FOR HATRED USED TO PERPETRATE CRIMINAL HATE CRIMES

THE US CONSTITUTION ART4 SEC2(1)THE CITIZENS OF EACH STATE SHALL BE ENTITLED TO ALL PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF CITIZENS IN THE SEVERAL STATES, They are US CITIZENS OR NOT ? ,THERE'ER WANTING TO PROTECT OLD GLORY , 28USC3002(15)(A)(B)(C),

OR RE-START THE DRAFT AND BAR ANY AND ALL FAITH BASED RELIGIOUS EXCUSSES NOT TO FIGHT FOR THE US.CORPORATION, SOONER THAN LATER U.S.A. WILL NEED THEM

"MLK's widow said of gay rights.... "For too long, our nation has tolerated the insidious form of discrimination against this group of Americans, who have worked as hard as any other group, paid their taxes like everyone else, and yet have been denied equal protection under the law...I believe that freedom and justice cannot be parceled out in pieces to suit political convenience. My husband, Martin Luther King, Jr. said, Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. On another occasion he said, I have worked too long and hard against segregated public accommodations to end up segregating my moral concern. Justice is indivisible. Like Martin, I don?t believe you can stand for freedom for one group of people and deny it to others. "

Is homophobia associated with homosexual arousal?

Adams HE, Wright LW Jr, Lohr BA.

Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens 30602-3013, USA.
Abstract

The authors investigated the role of homosexual arousal in exclusively heterosexual men who admitted negative affect toward homosexual individuals. Participants consisted of a group of homophobic men (n = 35) and a group of nonhomophobic men (n = 29); they were assigned to groups on the basis of their scores on the Index of Homophobia (W. W. Hudson & W. A. Ricketts, 1980). The men were exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian videotapes, and changes in penile circumference were monitored. They also completed an Aggression Questionnaire (A. H. Buss & M. Perry, 1992). Both groups exhibited increases in penile circumference to the heterosexual and female homosexual videos. Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.

NO XTIAN COMMENTER HAS EVER EFFECTIVELY ADDRESS THE HOW IS ITS A "SIN" AND "UNNATURAL" THEN WHY DOSE GOD YHVH PUT ESTROGEN IN THE FOOD/WATER/AND AIR SOURCE, for example you dont say street drugs is wrong, THEN put it in the food etc, IT'S UNJUST/ ENTRAPMENT, as the Judicial System would say, "GOD YHVH" MADE ESTROGEN FOOD/ WATER SOURCES have become much more easily accessable to all people so the Estrogen amount in males has risen as well, in the prehistoric and ancient and mideval time people did not eat as much, they had to hunt for food daily and many of times come back with little or nothing, not so for today, Fast Food and SuperMarkets makes it

A lot of the comments I see in support of 'Don't Ask Don't Tell' remind me of those used in the past to support the continuance of racial segregation. Apparently some people think whether or not someone else is entitled to their civil rights depends upon what they think of them. I am ashamed of our government, our military, and anyone who would deny the civil rights of those who serve our country.